Related Stories

Gov. Chris Gregoire said Friday that Seattle voters will have the final say whether to replace the aging and earthquake-damaged Alaskan Way Viaduct with a new, elevated structure or a more expensive tunnel.

After months of analysis of the physical, fiscal and political issues involved in replacing the viaduct, Gregoire concluded that any recommendation she could make would be doomed by the current political impasse.

Gregoire hopes voters will be able to cast ballots by April. They'd choose between a $2.8 billion replacement or a waterfront tunnel for at least $4.6 billion. All other options -- including simply repairing the span -- are off the table.

Though Gregoire deemed the finance plan for the tunnel alternative insufficient and unfeasible, she said the city's threats to deny permits for the less expensive elevated replacement could prove equally prohibitive.

"We are at a political stalemate and must find a path forward to replace the viaduct," Gregoire said. "I don't believe that, without a vote, either option will move forward. We need to hear directly from the people for whom this decision has the most impact."

Gregoire's deferral added yet another chapter in a dizzying grab, punt and pass play for control but not financial responsibility for the multibillion-dollar project.

Here's the condensed version:

City of Seattle to voters: Don't tell us how you want to replace the viaduct -- and please send money.

Seattle to the state: Don't tell us how to replace the viaduct -- and please send money.

State to Gregoire: Tell Seattle how to replace the viaduct --and please don't send any more money.

Gregoire to Seattle voters on Friday: Tell us how you want to replace the viaduct, and if you want a tunnel -- please send money.

The announcement got mixed reviews from some of the most powerful and outspoken participants in the battle.

"I very much appreciate the governor expressing ... her personal preference for the cut-and-cover tunnel," said Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, the tunnel's biggest proponent.

In fact, Gregoire also said "affordability is key and I cannot in good conscience make the finding that the prospects are now sufficient to move forward on the tunnel plan."

Nickels said: "We welcome a vote of the people and we believe that all of the requirements that the governor has laid out are achievable."

That contrasts with City Hall's position earlier this year, which was opposing a public vote on viaduct replacement options.

Nickels said Friday that tunnel or bridge, he would honor the voters' decision.

Gregoire said going forward with the tunnel option would also require a legally binding agreement from the city to pay the additional costs that come with tunneling as well as the cost overruns.

Undeterred, Nickels promised to "sharpen our pencils ... bring the cost down ... and identify and confirm that the other dollars are available."

He said Seattle voters could get a chance to weigh in as early as April on a ballot that would also include the tax increases needed to pay for the tunnel.

House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle, has been a staunch opponent of the tunnel option. He said although Gregoire deferred to the voters, she actually did make at least one important decision.

"The key thing that she was asked to decide was whether the funding or the financing was feasible," Chopp said. "She decided to say that the financing is not feasible. I'm very pleased with that."

Chopp said he had not seen the details of Gregoire's plan and did not want to comment, even in general terms about letting Seattle voters decide.

"The problem is there is a lot of details to be discussed, particularly in terms of what would be on the ballot, who would put it on the ballot and if it would be a city vote or a statewide vote; it's a state road." Chopp said.

Last year Gregoire and the Legislature labeled the viaduct a public safety crisis and approved a 9.5 cents-per-gallon gas tax increase and dedicated $2 billion to replacing it.

The money, along with federal dollars and a few other yet-to-be determined fees, would be enough to rebuild the double-decker bridge along the Seattle waterfront.

Since then, Nickels has described the viaduct as an eyesore and lobbied to bury the roadway in a tunnel to open the Seattle waterfront to new development.

But he has yet to secure the additional $1.8 billion needed to build the tunnel.

His problem may have gotten even more difficult Friday because Gregoire also elevated replacing the Evergreen Point Bridge to a top priority.

Gregoire recommended replacing the Seattle-to-Bellevue bridge with a six-lane roadway (four general purpose lanes with two transit/ca -pool lanes), which could cost between $3.9 billion and $4.4 billion.

She said the state had no viable plan to pay for the new bridge but must quickly move forward to come up with one.

Nickels' tunnel plan for the viaduct and the six-lane 520-bridge plan both assume an $800 million contribution from the three-county Regional Transportation Investment District. That money must be approved by voters, including those in Seattle, and would come on the heels of the viaduct vote this spring -- putting the old axiom "Seattle never saw a tax it didn't like" to the test.

"We were elected to make the hard decisions, not the voters, and either we the Legislature or the local government should make the tough decisions on the viaduct," he said.

Also controversial was Gregoire's determination of which options should be taken off the table, namely the "surface street" alternative that had been getting a lot of momentum in light of the increasing cost estimates for the elevated and tunnel options.

Gregoire said the surface option would significantly reduce the capacity of state Route 99 (the main road atop the viaduct) and clog downtown and Interstate 5 with more congestion.